On 10/25/06, robottaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Could I patch it up so that we have a 'sendTextMessage' method, and then
the
normal 'send' method (for binary)? This makes a little sense to me, in the
case that someone wants to send a message consisting of text as a binary
message.



This sounds ideal!

It looks like you guys are using the content-length header as the only
indication of text vs. binary in the STOMP transport for AMQ. I've seen
talk


Right.


of setting up the transport object so that it would handle a 'type' header
which would allow the user to have a content-length header but still
marshall the message into the AMQ system as a text message. I believe this
would be done using the header 'type' set to 'text'. If this is not what
happens then I will submit the client so that others  can use it to submit
TextMessage messages into AMQ from STOMP.


I think that what's going to happens is that the existing simplistic system
is going to remain as is.  I think STOMP will start evolving some extensions
that do more fancy mappings of STOMP frames to JMS messages.  And the STOMP
client will select which mapping strategy it expects to be used when it
connects. something like:


CONNECT
frame-translation: default

or

CONNECT
frame-translation: json

So one day we might develop a ruby client that uses the json translation and
the messages are encoded in JSON for example.  This could allow stomp
clients to receive Map messages too.


--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Ruby-STOMP-client---TextMessage-tf2504913.html#a6994038
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




--
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com

Reply via email to